US Presidential election 2016

simmo said:
You are dribbling. I would be prepared to wager that not one single member of ISIS or anyone who harbours even the slightest bit of support for ISIS is doing so as a result of the West turning a blind eye to the execution of homosexuals. Not one.

Omar: So what do you make of these western infidel pigs not doing anything about the execution of gays in Islamic countries then Ahmed?
Ahmed: It ******* enrages me. It makes me want to go out and kill gays. Decadent western scum.
Omar: Maybe it means they are weak. We should strike now.
Click to expand...

That makes absolutely no sense at all

You have completely missed the point

Does it need pointing out that when islamic states and preachers implement and preach the execution of gays then its hardly surprising that some believe they are "acting in gods will" in doing so

the hand wringers believe that this should be ignored and swept under the carpet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxnVSnnZs0Q

the uks leading anti semite believes this

http://leftfootforward.org/2010/09/...-a-leading-progressive-voice-in-muslim-world/
 
Last edited:
I'm afraid you're missing the point Clive

Trace the development of salafist preaching back up-stream and there is little doubt where it resolves to. Don't worry though, American public opinion is definitely shifting on this one, and in time, so too will that of the body politik. You won't need to defend one of your pet countries for too much longer

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html

You can't say what about the Islamic preachers, and then turn a blind eye to the frankly massive contribution made by Saudi Arabia. To do so is to be willfully negligent

The Saudis have of course been threatening to sell $750bn of American assests recently, and Obama has said he'll veto the bill that recently passed about releasing the 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 report that implicates low grade Saudi embassy staff. We'll see how this pans out

Malcolm Turnbull recently lamented how Indonesia was changing, Obama told him it was due to the influence of Saudi Arabia spreading its teachings. When Turnbull said "but aren't they supposed your allies", Obama said "its complicated" (extract from the Atlantic)

Having said that, I am also sympathetic to the argument that allowing or even propogating an environment that destablises Saudi Arabia is an even bigger **** storm waiting happen than any of the other ill-advised interventions to date. It is complicated
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
The legitimisation of execution of gays by Islamic states (Iran Palestine etc) and the very nature of the rhetoric of the lefts pet religion, is what drives these actions. There is no doubt about that
Click to expand...

I thought Palestine wasn't a state? :ninja: Regardless, it's telling that your two pet-hates are identified, when the real problems lie in states that are alleged allies of the West - Saudia Arabia (as Warbler points out) being prime amongst them.

Tracks is right. Everyone knows who the enemy is, and the words used by Obama are immaterial. As he claims, he is using language that is intended to modulate any perception that the US is at war with the entire religion. It is a cosmetic issue only, and nit-picking over it, is nothing more than a futile attempt at political point-scoring.
 
Last edited:
Grasshopper said:
It is a cosmetic issue only, and nit-picking over it, is nothing more than a futile attempt at political point-scoring.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that I agree with that - the people who I've seen arguing about it elsewhere have also been using language which intimates a direct desire to kill refugees/immigrants (no distinction appears to be made), or in fact anyone of Islamic appearance in the hope of killing those who are really responsible.

Which points to it more being a sectarian thing than simple point scoring.
 
To the dim witted here I gave those two states as examples of those that have most publicly executed gays in recent times

The fact that their islamist dictatorships are adored by leftist posters such as the above is a bonus
 
trackside528 said:
Orlando happens. Awful as it was - viewed through a strictly political lens this should be a positive for Trump. Again, no coherent reaction from the Trump campaign. Instead of re-enforcing the message, the messages that do come out invite further claims around racism etc. I just do not think that he has the campaign infrastructure or message discipline (both campaign and personal) to sustain the next 5 months.
Click to expand...

He's certainly giving an object lesson in how not to campaign

I think there's a few myths going up in smoke, not least of which is the one that his supporters were pedalling a few months ago about him being "genius". One thing he most certainly isn't is a genius! His camapign team is ridiculously small and inexperienced, and its starting to show. Roger Stone walked out on him in September when he refused to build a ground game. Ivanka was in charge of voter registration in New York and forgot that she was a registered independent (as was Eric Trump) so they couldn't participate. It's just symptomatic when you throw in other errors they made in Iowa, Colorado, West Virginia, and even surrendered delegates in Louisiana after they won the state.

The other thing that his supporters used to say whenever he came out with anything unhinged was that "he doesn't mean it". I was always doubtful about this claim, and never understood how 25% of the electorate thought they possessed some unique insight into the inner workings of the Trump mind. Having said that, I along with others expected some kind of pivot to the centre, it made strategic sense. But since clinching the nomination he's actually doubled down on many of these positions and pursued some frankly strange lines of attack. The only conclusion you can draw is that he does mean it

For the first time, I do wonder if he genuinely is Bill's stool pigeon as all the conspiracists are suggesting. If he picks Palin as his VP you've got to think he could be!

The campaign is seriosuly short of money compared to Hillary's. He's now said of course that he'll raise funds (as suspected, Trump hasn't got anything like the personal wealth he represented) and can't run a Presidential campaign from his own funds, much of which is tied up in assets. His own businesses are starting to struggle as he devalues his brand, and the GOP aren't exactly moving heaven and earth to throw their own resources behind him. The only thing he's got is control of the news cycle and his Twitter account. If the networks stopped featuring him, he'd be finished

There is of course a growing rumour now that he'd welcome an opportunity to get out of the race provided he could find an escape route that didn't leave him humiliated. Back room deal? or something that allows him plausible denial? Who knows, personally I suspect he'll want to go through with the convention where he'll bask in 4 days of hand picked tributes, and basically reprise Robespierre's festival of the supreme being. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him try and duck the debates though, and I really wouldn't be shocked if the Republicans are lining up in November with a different candidate.
 
Post accidentally deleted

What absolute uninformed rubbish.

Salafist are reposnisble for the massive number of public ally executed gays in Iran

Oh right Saudi tells Shia Iran what to do.

******* idiots

It was clear I was giving the two most recent an public examples of authorised execution of gays. I was clearly referring to Islam as a whone

Saudi is an obsession with some because it's an American allie . No comment at all on the actual events at all
 
If the slow witted left actually took time put they would find that saudi has NOT executed gays in public

It's a horrible country with disgraceful human rights but it's NOT an example to use here

So not only is there complete ignorance of the salafist influence over the Islamic world there is not even an example to give. The very idea that saudi dictates to its major enemy . ******* he'll

Pathetic effort
 
clivex said:
To the dim witted here I gave those two states as examples of those that have most publicly executed gays in recent times

The fact that their islamist dictatorships are adored by leftist posters such as the above is a bonus
Click to expand...

I wager you cannot provide evidence of a single person ever being executed by the Palestinian 'state', just because they are homsexual. Go on, have a bash......but you'll be wasting your time.

The last executions for homosexuality in Iran were in 2011, under the excreable Ahmedinejad regime. I choose not to condemn the current regime, for the sins of the previous one, in much the same way as I don't blame Angela Merkel for the Second World War.

Whilst homosexuality remains illegal in Iran, transsexualism - surprisingly - is not, if accompanied by physical gender reassignment operation. Iran currently conducts the 2nd highest sex-change operations of any country in the world other than Thailand; a fact which is somewhat at odds with the status you assign them as an "Islamist dictatorship".

Even your use of this particular term is bogus. There is a difference between 'Islamic' and 'Islamist' - the latter very-much being used to describe 21st -Century Sunni militancy, and not Shia theocracies like Iran.

Anyone knowing your MO knows exactly why you chose Palestine and Iran as your wholly-erroneous examples. The surprising thing is that you continue to bang-on about these two nations, yet never mention a peep about Saudi Arabia, Pakistan or any of the other Sunni states who do so much more than either the Palestinian Authority or Iran, to promote radicalism, jihad and the vile Sharia.
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
Post accidentally deleted

What absolute uninformed rubbish.

Salafist are reposnisble for the massive number of public ally executed gays in Iran

Oh right Saudi tells Shia Iran what to do.

******* idiots

It was clear I was giving the two most recent an public examples of authorised execution of gays. I was clearly referring to Islam as a whone

Saudi is an obsession with some because it's an American allie . No comment at all on the actual events at all
Click to expand...


Drivel which demonstrates only ignorance.

Salafism in Iran?

Go and do some basic research, FFS - no wonder you talk utter sh*ite on this subject.
 
Last edited:
Spot on GH, and well done on calling out Clive's zionist obsession.

Clive, you're making yourself look a fool on this thread.
 
Grasshopper said:
Salafism in Iran?
Click to expand...

They exist as terrorist groups trying to spread Wahhabism, but they aren't remotely connected to the regime as Clive is trying to suggest. Quite apart from anything, Salafism is an excluisve branch of Sunni Islam, which does kind of ensure that Iran doesn't follow it

Clive, you're embarrassing yourself
 
You are a lazy idiot grass

Hamas were throwing gays off buildings

You couldn't even look that up.
 
Wnkrs across the board

I cited preachers first who are largely saudi

Clearly I gave the two prime examples of state executing gays problem?

Saudi doesn't problem?

The obsessions here are saudi with one poster and Jews with another
 
Clearly there was meant to be a question mark at the end of the salafism line

It is you and warbler that are claiming that saudi salafism influences Iran . That's is ignorance in extremis
 
clivex said:
I cited preachers first who are largely saudi
Click to expand...

No you didn't (unless you've performed a ninja edit in between)

You cited preachers, (fair enough no one disagrees with this cancerous influence) but you tellingly swerved the issue of nationality and origin by failing to acknowledge the single biggest supplier and financier of these preachers. That is just willfully negligent, and anyone who can't make the connection between the spread of Salafist preaching and the hundreds of billions of petrodollars that Saudi Arabia pours into this loses the argument straight away

Tell me Clive, why did you fail to do this? Do you believe that the people who fund, train, and export radical preachers aren't contributing to the spread of Salafist teachings? If you do, how on earth can you possibly reconcile the contribution you say they're making. You're really arguing against yourself

The focus on Saudi Arabia Clive is because they're by far the biggest suppliers and financiers of these preachers. Can you really not see this?
 
Grasshopper said:
I wager you cannot provide evidence of a single person ever being executed by the Palestinian 'state', just because they are homsexual.
Click to expand...
But they do routinely torture and incarcerate homosexuals. This is well-documented but largely ignored by the leftist Western pro-palestinian sympathizers.
It is impossible to be openly Gay in Palestine. That is a fact.

When you have a ruling authority/government subsumed to the islamic religion casually persecuting Gays, is it any surprise that a proportion of the islamic religionists of that country(ies) will have an adverse view of LGBT and in the odd case will be motivated to carry out an outrage like Orlando.
That is all Clive is saying, yet some of you answer his words with flannel and fluff in a determined effort to obfuscate.
 
Preachers across the Islamic world are largely saudi or Egyptian

I linked to one for fucks sake A saudi isn't he

Stop trolling warbler you should be better than that
 
Ice Can't link it at moment but significant execution for gay sex by Hamas in Feb widely reported
 
clivex said:
Clearly there was meant to be a question mark at the end of the salafism line

It is you and warbler that are claiming that saudi salafism influences Iran . That's is ignorance in extremis
Click to expand...

I'll tell you what is "ignorance in extremis", its a post like these;

Your post #826

"Does it need pointing out that when islamic states and preachers implement and preach the execution of gays then its hardly surprising that some believe they are "acting in gods will" in doing so"

OK, so we accept that you're making the link to radical preachers. No problem with that. So where are you attributing these preachers origination to then? Who are you holding responsible?

Your post #832 gives us a clue

"Salafist are reposnisble for the massive number of public ally executed gays in Iran. Oh right Saudi tells Shia Iran what to do. ******* idiots"

You're linking Salafism to Iran as if it were a spontaneous movement that the Irainian government follows, or even something of their own creation and adherence (as you've clearly absolved Saudi of any link to it regarding Iran). Sadly Salafism has no base in Shia Islam. It comes from the other side.

"Saudi tells Shia Iran what to do". I'm not sure you understand the dynamics here do you? Saudi doesn't tell Shia Iran what to do (as in the government of Iran), Saudi tells Sunni Iran what to do, because believe it or not Clive, there are Sunnis living in Iran, in much the same way that Shias live in Sunni countries. These Sunnis are the people that Saudi Arabia is trying to appeal to, and to do this they're sponsoring the spread of Salafist preaching and the teaching of Wahhabism. Believe it or not, there are Sunnis living in christian countries too Clive as minority populations who are also being fed this doctrine. Do you blame the host country (well at one level you might do) or do you point the finger at the people who are paying for its growth?

You can mock Obama for failing to use the words "radical islamic terrorism" as much as you like, but equally you're no better when you willfully cover your eyes against who the source origin is. As I said though, American public opinion is definitely switching on this one, and their political leaders are behind the curve. Sooner or later they'll start calling Saudi Arabia out. Saudi is in descent at the moment, and where they'll be in ten years time is anyone's guess. You won't have to defend the undefendable that much longer

"My grandfather rode a camel, my father rode a camel, I drive a Mercedes, my son drives a Land Rover, his son will drive a Land Rover, but his son will ride a camel"
 
Last edited:
LOL, Warbler, you're reading it all wrong !
Insert an imaginary question mark at the end of the Salafist line you quoted, and the sentence will take on an entirely different slant. You do "get" sarcasm and sardonic humour, I know.
Clive has already stated the obvious -- that he accidentally omitted the question mark. It's quite clear that he did forget, or maybe he assumed that you and others would have got the intention without it.
 
icebreaker said:
LOL, Warbler, you're reading it all wrong !
Insert an imaginary question mark at the end of the Salafist line you quoted, and the sentence will take on an entirely different slant. You do "get" sarcasm and sardonic humour, I know.
Clive has already stated the obvious -- that he accidentally omitted the question mark. It's quite clear that he did forget, or maybe he assumed that you and others would have got the intention without it.
Click to expand...


Get Clive to sort out his fu*cking grammar then. The fact that there was no ? renders it with an entirely different context.
 
Back
Top